role of judiciary-winter2012

7/27/2019 Role of Judiciary-winter2012

1/18

Journal of Political Studies, Vol. 19, Issue - 2, 2012, 125:142Role of Judiciary in the Evolvement of Democracy in Pakistan

Iram Khalid

Abst ract

In the case of Pakistan, the judiciary failed to check an extraconstitutional regime change. This practice has questioned the

judicial independence as well as weakened the confidence ofthe institution. Technical steps, legislative corrections andreforms cannot revise the role of judiciary. It needs crediblecommitment by the government to respect the rule of law, atransparent system of judicial appointments and to ensure that

judicial decisions at all levels may be practiced. The present

research focuses on (i) the constitutional and politicalexperiences of Pakistans struggle for democracy (ii) to link thestability of the political system with the judiciary will furthercreate certain debatable issues? The research will concludethat a more comprehensive and coherent policy is needed totackle this technical as well as political issue. For the survivalof democracy and stability of the political system it is importantthat all the institutions must remain in their describedlimitations. This strategy will avoid any further bumpy ride of

Pakistans political journey.

Key Words:J udicial activism,Democratic evolvement,Rule of law, Role ofmilitary, legitimate rule, Democracy.

Introduction:

Democracy is conditional in its nature. The principles of rule of law are thebasic substance of democracy. Rule of law includes supremacy ofconstitution, equality before the law and civil liberties. Democracy is of

course the best form of government. The superiority of democracy to theother systems of government lies in the principle of separation of powers andthe corresponding checks and balances that the three arms of governmentexercise over one another (Parry & Mora, 1994; Hague & Harrop, 2001).Pakistans experience with democracy is not a success story. Lack ofperformance by the elected institutions gave the opportunity to the stateinstitution to intervene in politics. The strained civil military relations havecritical implications for the civilian governments. The strength of the politicalleaders or the political government is rooted in popular support which only

comes through the performance. When this factor is lacking then non-representative institutions find the gape and took the control. In this scenariojudiciary failed to check an extra constitutional regime change in the case ofPakistan (Sayeed, 1983: 90-96; Callard, 1968: 95-100).

Author is Associate Professor of Political Science Department, University of thePunjab, Lahore.


2/18

IramKhalid

126

In such a grim scenario role of judiciary has also not been solid. As a matterof fact Pakistan is one of the glaring examples of non consolidateddemocracies. The history of democracy in Pakistan has created theinstitutional inabilities, so the state is still countering with the structural

inabilities. It is only because of this that army got open opportunities to usurppower and dismantle the basis of democracy. Army has always been inquest of legitimacy and judiciary has fulfilled this requirement very often. It isobserved that J udiciary has momentous role in the course ofdemocratization. This state institution can do commendable service inbuilding up a democratic society. Indeed it is predestined for the success ofdemocracy. Thus, for this purpose it should work as a free institution whichhas its own network as far as rules and regulations are concerned and workwithout any pressures by government as well as from any other institution1.In case of our country this has never come true. In order to get a clearpicture of the issue under discussion it is essential to assess minutely theworking of judiciary and to analyze few significant cases. Under both civiland military rule judiciary kept on working under several notions andrequirements. Pakistans security profile has strong implications over thedemocratic and institutional development. In such a scenario role of judiciaryhas never been the simple one. There have been several issues andimpacts to be catered and compromised. That is why when course ofdemocracy is assessed all these factors are kept in view that have shapedthe mode of institutions and line of harmony standing in between the

institutions (Yusuf, 1998: 31-68; Mahmud, 1990: 17-22).

Impact of Judic iary on Democratic Evolvement

Civil government initiated the history of democracy in Pakistan. It was anelected assembly that continued the democratic rule in Pakistan in 1947.

The task before that constituent assembly was immense. It was destined toset trends and democratic values. It was its task to shape the futureinstitutions. Unfortunately this significant task was undermined by severalpersonal interests, lack of consensus and some prevailing security issuesand economic pressures. It is interesting enough to observe that it duringthis era it was judiciary that gave protection to the undemocratic moves ofthe governor general and then military rule. On the other hand the allegationis reversed. It observed on the part of judiciary that it has to face pressuresat the hands of executive and military rules. J ustice Qazi Muhammad J amilis of the view; the judiciary cannot fight the dictators. We require strongPolitical Institution which are lacking in the country.

Geoffery K. Roberts opines that judiciary is the branch of government and

administered by the executive branch, in cases where dispute arises as tomeaning, validity or supposed branch of such laws (1971: 61). J udiciary isthe guardian of the mass liberties and rights. Its independence is one of theessentials of democracy. It because of such significance H. Rahman assertsthat. Nothing touches the welfare and security of the citizen more than the

judiciary. No mass, therefore, can over-estimate the importance of the


3/18

Role of Judiciary in the Evolvement of Democracy in Pakistan

127

mechanism of justice (Rahman, 1958: 189). Moreover The Universaldeclaration of human rights Art.10 and the international covenant on civil andpolitical rights Art.14 (1) proclaim that everyone should be entitled to a fairand public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal

established by law. An independent judiciary is indispensable to theimplementation of this right. Simply stated, judicial independence is theability of a judge to decide a matter from pressure or inducements.Additionally, the institution of the judiciary as a whole must also beindependent by being separate from government and other concentrations ofpower. There are several hurdles in the way of an independent judiciary. Avery tactful control is required when there is question of the control of armyby judicial means. A mature political system must possess maturity. It is onlybecause of this maturity there can emerge the virtue of accommodation,acceptance, flexibility, transparency and accountability. In the institution like

army there is required sound process of socialization that can be helpful inmaking it accept the supremacy of civilian institutions.

Democracy in Pakistan has passed through several ebbs and flows. Thereare numerous factors responsible for it. Currently it will be assessed thathow military and judiciary have halted the course of democracy. Theconstitutional history of Pakistan is not smooth and sound. The firstconstitution was passed in 1956. Prior to this constitution the country wasbeing governed under the amended act of 1935. Governor General under

this act had acquired autocratic powers. It because of this fact that wheneverthere emerged any Constitutional crisis, the superior judiciary has beenasked to play its leading role for resolving it. The courts judgment in suchConstitutional cases was with far reaching effects. It can be easily observedthat the courts decision proved to be with long reaching effects on stabilityand instability for democracy and Constitutional Assembles (Aziz, 2009: 33-46; Cohen, 2012: 1-69).

Role of Judiciary in Crisis Management in Pakistan Politics (Study ofSome Cases)

First Era 1947- 1958

The first case that actually has cast its shadow over the years of democraticevolvement came forth on 24th October, 1954. Governor General, GhulamMuhammad dissolved the first constituent assembly by deeming it that it hadlost the confidence of masses and unable to work accurately. The speaker ofthat very assembly, Maulvi Tamizuddin Khan filed a petition against theaction of, Ghulam Muhammad to dissolve the constituent assembly. The

Sindh Chief Court issue a writ of mandamus to the appellants and order forthe restoration of it by equating its dissolution as illegal. The GovernorGeneral than filed an appeal before the federal court against the verdict ofSindh high court that it had no jurisdiction to issue writs under Article 223A.

The court decided in favour of Ghulam Muhammad and set aside the


4/18

IramKhalid

128

decision of Sindh Chief Court by alleging that it did not have a jurisdiction toissue writs, as the bill for this did not received the assent of GovernorGeneral (Ahmad, 2009: 80-120).

Validation of the dissolution of assembly by the court set a sorry precedent inthe parliamentary history of Pakistan. This decision generated politicalinstability which proved disastrous for the future of democratization. J udiciarystood up as a hurdle in the way of democracy after such a decision. It wassuch decision which made the situation a complex one. In fact it was this

judgment which affected the prestige and credibility in the eyes of commonmasses. Not only this but this decision gave rise to other issues regardingpowers and privileges of Governor General and nature of the laws passed bythe Assembly.

As a result Usif Patel and other VS Crown, was presented before the court.This case was the result aforesaid case. The core issue was regarding thevalidity ofSection 92-A of the government of India Act, 1935. It was arguedthat the insertion of any section into India Act, 1935 would be invalid withoutthe assent of Governor General, as was held in Maulvi Tamizuddin KhanCase. They demanded for their liberty by deeming it under that law whichhad not took the assent of Governor General. The court upheld the detentionof petitioners as illegal and set the appellants at liberty. An emphasis wasalso laid that the Governor General could not substitute the constituent

assembly, therefore, it was asked for the immediate need to form anotherrepresentative body, so that invalid legislation could be validated (Sayeed,1980: 90-100).

The after effects of this case made the situation worse. It ignited a set oflitigations challenging a number of governmental actions. As fardemocratization is concerned it played a positive and conducive role. Forinstance, it was because of courts verdict that bounds the GovernorGeneral not to concentrate all powers to himself rather court induces him toform constituent assembly of elected representative. Therefore, it can bealleged that by this the Federal Court took a bold decision and played itsconstructive role for the sake of democracy. It kept the then GovernorGeneral within certain limits, as he was intended to formulate a Constitutionof even his own desires. Thats why it goes in the favour of establishment ofdemocracy and curtailment of the powers of the then Governor-General.Governor general, in response, made a reference before the Federal Courtunder section 213 of India Act. He invoked various questions before thesuperior court to seek its vantage point. The apex court relied on theDoctrine of State Necessity in order to avert the legal and political gap.

That was how doctrine of state necessity crop up in the Constitutional andPolitical History of Pakistan. Unfortunately after this, the country could notrelinquish this doctrine of state necessity for giving validity to what wasillegal. In later course of time this allures the future politicians and powerseeker to use it as a pretext for taking extra-constitutional steps. Although itwas correct that the situation very grave yet it ignited a question in ones


5/18


6/18

IramKhalid

130

there might start an unending tussle between executive and judiciary. Forthis situation they ascribed this doctrine of necessity as appropriate.Whatsoever the justifications it remained intact that this doctrine forvalidation of military takeover was not substantial when one carefully took

the analysis of this courts verdict. However the fact remains intact that itbecame difficult for the country to depart from this doctrine. Consequently,Pakistan has to face Martial Law again and again.

Now the country was under 1962 constitution which was presidential innature. Basic democracy system never proved a true substitute of genuinedemocracy. The end result was chaos and a strong public demand fordemocratic change. Again the result was imposition of Martial Law andabrogation of 1962s Constitution in 1969. It finished even a little bitdemocracy and the country again reach on the verge of uncertainty. Public,quite naturally looked up judiciary again for salvation. This very imposition ofmartial was challenged in a Constitutional Case entitled, Miss Asma J ilani Vsthe Government of the Punjab an Another, gave a high position to the

judiciary to play its decisive role for democratization. In this case the handingover of power to Yahya Khan by Mr. Ayub Khan was declared illegal. It wasalso decided that all the legal and administrative measures taken by thisunauthorized and unconstitutional regime cannot be upheld and the basis oflegitimacy. Moreover, the court used a power of judicial review and overruled the courts verdict in Dosso Case and condones doctrine of state

necessity (Khan, 2003).

This case is of great significance. One thing is worth mentioning that thiscase was decided when Yahya Khan was not in power. After this case Mr.Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto 1st Civil Martial Law Administrator removed the MartialLaw from the country and allowed the selected assemblies to function. Assuch the country moved again on the road of democracy after fourteen yearsof dictatorship. The decision in Asma J ilani case brought back the country tothe road of democracy after a long period of dictatorship. In these two eras, itcan be observed that judiciary followed the political power trends instead offollowing the natural trends of judiciary. Now as is described earlier, the roleof judiciary as guardian of constitution and democracy did not emerged incase of Pakistan. As far as executive is concerned, it has also not played amature and responsible role for the promotion of democracy. Insufficient andincapable executive provided chances to army to intervene in the sphere ofpolitical power. All these factors get together and undermined the growth andevolvement of democracy.

Third Era 1973 to date

In this era role of judiciary will be assessed under both army and civiladministrations. There two army take over (1977 and 1999) and six civilianadministrations (J unejo administration, three PPP and two PML-Nadministrations). The constitution of 1973 is one the great achievement ofthe democratic government. This constitution is based on consensus. This


7/18


131

constitution just after a short while of promulgation introduced manyamendments. These amendments gave executive superiority over judiciary.In order to further avoid the military intervention and Article 6 was insertedin 1973 Constitution. In spite of all these precautionary measures there was

again the imposition of Martial Law in 1977 (Khan, 2003). Overwhelminglypowerful executive brought the tinge of autocracy and the balancemaintained by the separation of power in a pure democracy vanished verysoon.

This take over was also challenged in court in Constitutional case entitled,Begum Nusrat Bhutto Vs Chief of Army Staff and Another. On 7th J uly 1977,General Zia-ul-Haq came into power as the chief Martial Administrator afterremoving the Government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. He suspended theConstitution of 1973 instead of its abrogation after having consultation with

the then Chief J ustice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. As Mr. Zulfiqar AliBhutto was arrested, therefore, Begum Nusrat Bhutto assumed theleadership of PPP. She submitted a petition before the Supreme Court ofPakistan against imposition of Martial Law and detention of Mr. Zulfiqar AliBhutto in aforementioned case. In this case different Constitutional pointswere discussed in detail regarding the enforcement of Martial Law.Ultimately the Superior Court dismissed the Constitutional petition filed byBegum Nusrat Bhutto by deeming it no-maintainable, relying on the Doctrineof State Necessity. It was stated that the circumstances were so serious

after the movement launched by PNA against Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto thatmilitary intervention became necessary to safe the country from such criticalsituation. By this Doctrine of State Necessity once again invoked to validatethis very imposition of Martial Law.

The conclusion of this case derailed democracy for more than a decade. Itwas such decision which played its negative role while providing a blanketcover to imposition of Martial Law. Again it was army that utilized theopportunity created by the malfunctioning of executive and judiciary providedprotection to this decision. While commenting on the role of judiciary and

military one cannot turn a blind eye to the insufficiencies of executive. As isthe case of the evolvement of democracy, nothing can be ignored that haltedthe way of democracy. It was always some insufficiency, malfunctioning orautocracy of executive that created chances for army intervention.

On October 12th, 1999 there was again military take over and ousted the civilgovernment. The military intervention in this case again challenged beforethe superior court in Constitutional case entitled, Zafar Ali Shah andGeneral Pervaz Musharaf Chief Executive of Pakistan. In this case the

Doctrine of State Necessity was invoked again to justify the militaryintervention. However, the restrictions were imposed that General Electionsshould be held within three years and transferred the power to the electedrepresentatives of the masses. It was also ordered that the salient featuresof the Constitution of 1973 would not be changed by utilizing any tactics.


8/18

IramKhalid

132

An overview: Role of Judiciary and i ts Impacts (1947-1977

Sr.#

Name of theCase

Main Issue Decis ion Role &Impacts

1 MaulviTamizuddinKhan Case.

Dissolution ofAssembly.

Decided infavour ofGovernment.

Negative

2 Usif PatelsCase.

Consent ofGovernorGeneral essential

or not for thesanction of theBill.

Consent isnecessary forthe approval of

every Bill.

Both positiveandNegative.

3 Reference byGovernorGeneral.

Court Opineabout theLegislativePowers ofGovernorGenera.

Retrospectiveeffect was givento laws.

Both PositiveandNegative.

4 Dosso Case. Imposition of

Martial Law isvalid or not.

Decided in

favour ofGovernment.

Prevailing

wasNegative.

5 Asma J ilanisCase.

Imposition ofMartial Law isvalid or not.

Decided infavour ofGovernment.

Both PositiveandNegative.

Role of Army and Judic iary under 1973 Const itut ion

The preambles of all regular constitutions of Pakistan (1956, 1962 and 1973)assign sovereignty all over the universe to God Almighty. The peopleexercise this authority as a sacred trust within the limits prescribed by Him.

This exercise of power and authority is to be done through the chosenrepresentatives (Rizvi, 2012).

This means that authority and power of the state is located in the electedparliament, making it the salient institution as compared to the bureaucracy,the military and the judiciary, although these institutions have their domainsof authority under the constitution and law (Rizvi, 2012) .Army take over is

much criticized for the denouncement of democracy but here there are somegrim examples under civilian rules which cause degeneration in developmentof democratic values in the country. Political stability is an essentialingredient for democratization. Unfortunately the political institutions couldnot be flourished due to dissolution of assemblies repeatedly. After theenforcement of 1973 Constitution there was only Bhutto government that


9/18


10/18


11/18


135

to amend the constitution. In the Pakistan Lawyers Forum case (2005) theSupreme Court validated both the Seventeenth Amendment and the PHAA,based on an extension of the doctrine of state necessity. In legitimizing thepower of the military and executive over the Parliament, this case further

strengthened the popular perception of the subservience of the SupremeCourt to the military regime. Here in case of democrization, it can be safelydeduced that the role of judiciary was not in favour of constitution anddemocracy (Malik, 2010: 1-10; Baxter, 2004: 53-60).

The activism in judiciary came after the appointment of J ustice IftikharMuhammad Chaudhary in 2005. CJ P began to exercise the courts suo moto

judicial review powers. Suo moto, means "on its own motion". In November2007, President Musharraf announced he would introduce a constitutionalamendment to withdraw the Supreme Courts suo moto powers under the

authority of his Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO). Two cases pursuedby the Supreme Court in the latter part of 2006 became a source ofsignificant unease within government circles. Both cases were of immensesignificance. In first case the Supreme Court invalidated the privatization ofthe Pakistan Steel Mills. It rendered a judgment that painted a grim picture ofeconomic mismanagement, failure to abide by rules and patronage ofbusinessmen implicated in securities fraud. This judgment was source ofdiscomfort within the government circles.

In the second case, the Supreme Court began to pursue habeas corpuspetitions. This petition was brought by the relatives of the missing persons.

These missing persons had allegedly been held by intelligence agencieswithout legal process. The Supreme Courts decisions in these cases werepreceded by several cases decided by the High Courts, which hadchallenged the abuse of powers by the executive. It was an open challengeto the high handedness of the executive. Surprisingly, General Musharraf,suspended the CJ P from office declaring him to be non-functional on March9, 2007. General Musharraf moved a reference for the CJ Ps accountabilitybefore the Supreme J udicial Council (SJ C) under Article 209 of the

Constitution. The court invalidated the suspension of the CJ P and reinstatedhim to his position. This case considerably enhanced the powers and theprestige of the position of the Chief J ustice of Pakistan.

18th Amendment and Role of Judic iary in the Evolvement of Democracyin Pakistan

The 18th Amendment is a detailed and significant document that makesseveral changes in the constitution and removes the distortions caused by

two military rulers, i.e. Generals Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf. It iscomparable to the 8th and 17th constitutional amendments of 1985 and2003 respectively. These amendments introduced far-reaching changes inthe constitution. However, there is one key difference between theseamendments. The 8th and 17th constitutional amendments were meant to


12/18

IramKhalid

136

civilianize military rule and provide constitutional and legal cover to theactions and policies of the military regimes. The 18th Amendment representsthe triumph of the democratic political forces because they joined together topromulgate an amendment that has made the constitution more democratic,

shifted the balance of power in favour of the prime minister and parliamentand expanded the scope of provincial autonomy (Rizvi, 2010). It may alsobe pointed out that the 18th Amendment has also restricted the power of the

judiciary to legitimise military takeover or any unconstitutional change ofgovernment. A new clause has been added to Article 6 of the constitutionthat stipulates that any act of high treason as defined in Section 1 and 2 ofArticle 6 shall not be validated by any court including the Supreme Courtand a High Court. This clearly covers the question of validation of anymilitary takeover (Rizvi, 2012).

There is important clause 175 A ,which gives the procedures that provide forsharing the power of appointment of judges of the superior courts by the

judiciary and the executive. The discretion of the executive varies fromcountry to country but it is not bound to accept the recommendations of thechief justice. The 18th amendment eliminates the Concurrent List, anenumeration of areas where both federal and provincial governments maylegislate but federal law prevails. Laws governing marriage, contracts,firearms possession, labor, educational curriculums, environmental pollution,bankruptcy, and 40 other diverse areas will now devolve to the provinces

with the list eliminated, and each provincial assembly will be responsible fordrafting its own laws on the issues. Reformers have touted this measure asa necessary shift for a more federal system, but there are some concernsabout the ability of provincial governments to assume effective regulatoryauthority in these areas, which they are now bound to do by J une 30, 2011.

Pakistans parliament has institutionalized a new political consensus on thecountrys legal and political framework with the 18th amendments passage.It gives the parliament, prime minister, judiciary, and the provincialgovernments greater autonomy under the constitution. While these changesrepresent an opportunity for Pakistans political parties to begin seriouslyaddressing the countrys critical economic and security problems, the fullimpact of the amendments many.

An Assessment

Democracy is a coherent way of government. In a democracy, judiciary, civiland military establishments represent a state. These institutions allow rulingpolitical party to run routine affairs of the country as per its party manifesto.

However, demands for protecting authority of chief executive and failure toshow equal respect for other state institutions are hypocritical. If there isdisharmony in these institutions then it is considered as a threat todemocracy, democratic institutions and the state. There is a dire need to getrid of this authoritarian and autocratic culture of double standards to boostdemocracy in Pakistan. J udiciary needs to be expanded and strengthened to


13/18


137

reinforce democracy at the grassroots. It is a noticeable fact that the numberof courts has not increased in Pakistan since its independence. Nodemocracy can serve its people or grow stronger unless it is ready to ensure

justice and support independent judiciary. Along with other institutions it is

equally important to pay attention to this organ as well.In current scenario two things are greatly affecting the system and society ofPakistan. One is growing expectations regarding judiciary and the other isdependence on media. The process of filtration is totally missing in the flowof Information which is casting negative impact on both state and society.

This very fact is causing confusion and misunderstanding. There are manyissues regarding the defence of the state which are required to be kept insecret. Converting such matters of institutions into a public debate, that arevital for the defence and the consolidation of the state, is not an appropriatedirection. As far as growing expectations from judiciary are concerned,

constitutional amendments can only convert the judiciary into a stronginstitution. Unless the entire aspects of political process are broughttogether and unless the course of army intrusion into politics cannot behalted, the judiciary cannot gain strength. J udiciary cannot remain aloof fromthe influence of these two factors. There are so many strategic compulsionson system and the army. The way external powers and internal elementsare exerting pressures on the army; this can only create conflicts rather thanbringing them down. To look towards judiciary to halt the way of armysinvolvement in the politics, is not possible unless the system develop

traditions like; to keep within the prescribed jurisdictions, rule of law andcoherent policy by all institutions.

As political and constitutional history of the state is analyzed, it is observedthat authoritarian rule of army might crush the very institution of judiciary ona single controversial decision. Probably under these circumstances judiciarydeems it appropriate to heed less to democratization. There were someserious and grave troubles which this institution had to face. These problemsbadly affect its role and efficiency for democratization. At the same place it isalso observed that whenever the judiciary considered that the circumstances

were appropriate, it played its conducive and contributory role for upholdingthe democratic values. The core reason which the judiciary had to face wasrelated to its very independences. As a matter of fact, no judiciary can playits effective role towards democratization in the absence of judicialindependences. A strong institution of judiciary is inevitable fordemocratization.

18th amendment in this regard has contributed a lot in the strength of thesystem. It has provided considerable autonomy to the judiciary. Again,

democracy is a conditional way of government. It need certain prerequisitesfor its survival and continuity. There are few instruments which are requiredfor its viable survival and they are;

Continuity of political process


14/18

IramKhalid

138

Rule of law

Implementation of judicial decisions

To keep prescribed institutional jurisdictions.

Civilian institutions have to perform

The security profile may be re evaluated.

These elements will not only revive the public trust but by practicing them theway of army intervention into politics will also be halted. To be very honest,these constitutional amendments are just one element, they are not anabsolute elucidation. It is because thinking without practice is just futile.

Time frame is another important factor. Considerable time is needed for thepolitical leadership to establish reliance on judiciary. There is a strongpossibility that this over speeding can put this nation and its institutions into a

yet another trial.

The judiciary was supportive of the militarys expanded role in the past. Itendorsed the direct assumption of power by the military on all fouroccasions. Since the restoration of the present Chief J ustice and other

judges in 2009, the Supreme Court and the High Courts have engaged in ahigh pace judicial activism and have built pressure on the elected parliamentand the elected federal government. The comments of the judges, aspublished in the media, have political implications in the politically dividedpolitical context. The Chief J ustice has argued more than once that the

parliament is not the supreme institutions and that the Supreme Court hasan overriding power with reference to constitution. This has createduncertainty about what the parliament can or cannot do, especially after oneprime minister was convicted by the Supreme Court on contempt of courtand sent home. The key issue is that democracy requires institutionalbalance and restraint rather than one state institution dominating all others,especially the elected ones. The confrontation between the electedexecutive and non-elected judiciary is not a good omen for democracy(Rizvi, 2012).

Keeping in view all these factors, one can safely deduce that despite therising difficulties the current J udiciary-Executive confrontation does not seemto pose a direct threat toward the possible derailment of the presentdemocratic set up. The real threat faced by the government still remains thepopular resentment over governance weaknesses and corruption, a possiblemilitary takeover, and the increasing differences between the governmentand its political allies. These elements are not novel. It has always been thissituation which let the army to grab ruling opportunity. The federalgovernments poor performance in governance and socio-economic

development is undeniable. Some of its problems like the memo issue orpolitical (mis) handling of the presidents illness reflect serious managementproblems with the federal government and the PPP. However, thecircumstantial factors and the political and military dynamics can keep itfloating, although it will drift from crisis to crisis (Rizvi, 2011).


15/18


139

Pakistans present judiciary has not been imposed by the establishment butwas brought into office due to a popular movement in the urban areas ofPakistan. An active judicial role exercised by an independent J udiciary canbe a democratic and constitutionally legitimate means to strengthen a

developing democratic system. As a guardian of constitution and thecustodian of the rights of people there is a significant role for judiciary to playin this regard. But the condition is that all political and state institutions needto work together within a democratic constitutional framework to address andto manage the difficulties in their way.


16/18

IramKhalid

140

End Notes

Ahmad, Manzoor and Ghaus, Khalida. (1999). Pakistan Prospects and

Perspectives. Karachi: Laureate Packages.

Ahmad, Mushtaq. Government And Politics In Pakistan. Karachi: Zaki SonsPrinters.

Ahmed, Khaled. (2010). The Musharraf Years Vol1 Political Developmentsin Pakistan 1999-2008. Lahore: Maktaba J adeed Press, Vanguard Books(Pvt.) Ltd.

Azam, K. M. (2002). Pakistan Economy, Politics, Philosophy & Religion.Karachi: Royal Book Company.

Aziz, Sartaj. (2009). Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones inPakistans History. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

Baxter, Craig. (2004). Pakistan on the Brink Politics, Economics, andSociety. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

Bhutto, Benazir. (2007). Whiter Pakistan: Dictatorship or Democracy?.

Lahore: Al-Hamd Publications.

Callard, Keith. (1968). Pakistan: A Political Study. Karachi: Oxford UniversityPress.

Cohen, Stephen P. and others. (2012). Pakistan: Arrival and Departure. In.Stephen P. Cohen (Eds.).The Future of Pakistan. Lahore: Maktaba J adeedPress, Vanguard Books (Pvt.) Ltd.

Hague, Rod & Harrop, Martin. (2001). Comparative Govt. and Politics: AnIntroduction. New York: Pealgrave Hond. Mills, Besingstoke, Hampshire.

J ohn, Wilson. (2008). Pakistan Four Scenarios. New Delhi: Pentagon Press.

J ones, Owen Bennett. (2002). Pakistan Eye of the Storm. Lahore: VanguardBooks, Banquet Printing Press.

Khan, Hamid. (2003). Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan.Karachi: Mas Printers.

Mahmud, Prof. Khalid. (1990). Pakistans Political Scene (1984-1990)Reflections of a Journalist. Lahore: Rhots Books.

Malik, Anas. (2011). Political Survival in Pakistan Beyond Ideology. NewYork: Routledge.


17/18


18/18

IramKhalid

142

Shafqat, Saeed. (2007). New Perspectives on Pakistan: Visions for theFuture. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

Syed, Anwar. (2007). Issues and Realities of Pakistani Politics. Lahore:

Izharsons Printers.

Yusuf, Hamid. (1998). Pakistan: A Study of Political Developments 1947-97.Lahore: Maktaba J adeed Press.

role of judiciary-winter2012

Documents